The Spirit Level by Richard Wilkinson and Kate Pickett is an absolutely fascinating book. It’s been at the centre of heated political debate for over a year and it continues to influence our national politics.

In essence the argument is that for the richest nations on earth getting richer does nothing for their citizens quality of life. And if that getting richer increases inequality it makes life worse. The more equal a society is the better off everyone is.

Taking ten indicators of social wellbeing (life expectancy, teenage births, obesity, mental illness, homicides, imprisonment rates, mistrust, social mobility, education and infant mortality) the authors seek to demonstrate that in almost every one the more equal the society the better they far against all those indicators.

It’s why the Scandinavian countries always come top in almost any ranking of quality of life, they are in essence more equal societies. Japan also does well but got there in a different way. Japan achieved equality by paying people more (so not so much difference between low and high income earners) while the Scandinavians tax people more (and redistribute the income). The UK is a chronically unequal country and so generally fares pretty badly while the US fares worst of all on almost every measure.

The book is littered with tables and graphs and on first reading you certainly feel their case is overwhelming. Although not everyone agrees. I’m left-leaning so I’m inclined to intuitively believe them so I read a few reviews from the right and so entered the heated debate. As is often the case the best place to find all these reviews in one place is Wikipedia which gives a helpful overview of the book and the debate. I’d also recommend my friend Jeremy’s positive review.

So what do I think? First a comment about the style of the book. If this book was retold or written by Malcolm Gladwell it would sell hundreds of thousands not tens of thousands. It lacks killer stories and the personal touch. It’s an important read, an crucial read even but not one grippingly told.

As for the content, I think it’s generally speaking on the money. It’s more optimistic about the human race than I am (I after all think we are sinful to the core) and more convinced of our abilities to save ourselves. It has the usual nod to evolution and expects humanity to evolve on a generally positive upwards trend. It assumes that we all want to make more equal societies and thinks we are less selfish or self-interested than maybe the case. It’s also lighter on the solutions than the analysis but that’s to be expected as they point out with Japan and Sweden, you can go either way or a bit of both.

But I think the overall case is hard to argue, for example the children in the lowest social class in Sweden (and therefore most at risk of infant mortality) have a greater chance of survival than the children in the highest social class in the UK (those least at risk of infant mortality). The explanation? Sweden is a more equal society. For more facts and figures you can look at the website of their campaign The Equality Trust. For some up to date examples read this recent stories from the Daily Telegraph.

In more equal societies there is less crime so the money spent on prisons could be spent on education. In more equal societies there is less obesity and all its health related issues and the money could be spent on better transport and so on and on. Equality reduces crime, teenage pregnancy etc..and allows a society to continue to invest in the quality of life of the nation.

I’m going to ask my MP if he’s read it and if not I’m going to send him a copy. If you’re interested in social policies, politics and dealing with social injustice then this is a must read even if you disagree. Highly recommended.